Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 67041 

1 ‘‘Evaluating the National Mango Board’s 

Programs for Impact on U.S. Demand for Mangos,’’ 

Ronald L. Ward. 

finalizing the interim rule, without 

change, as published in the Federal 

Register (79 FR 45673, August 6, 2014) 

will tend to effectuate the declared 

policy of the Act. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 945 

Marketing agreements, Potatoes, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

■ Accordingly, the interim rule that 

amended 7 CFR part 945 and that was 

published at 79 FR 45673 on August 6, 

2014, is adopted as a final rule, without 

change. 

Dated: November 5, 2014. 

Rex A. Barnes, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26679 Filed 11–10–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 1206 

[Document Number AMS–FV–14–0047] 

Mango Promotion, Research, and 

Information Order; Section 610 Review 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Confirmation of regulations. 

SUMMARY: This document summarizes 

the results of an Agricultural Marketing 

Service (AMS) review of the Mango 

Promotion, Research, and Information 

Order (Order) under criteria contained 

in section 610 of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA). Based upon its 

review, AMS concluded that there is a 

continued need for the Order. 

DATES: This confirmation is effective 

November 12, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons may 

obtain a copy of the review on the 

Internet at: http://www.regulations.gov 

or request a copy from the Promotion 

and Economics Division, Fruit and 

Vegetable Program, AMS, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture (USDA or 

Department), 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW., Room 1406–S, Stop 0244, 

Washington, DC 20250–0244; facsimile: 

(202) 205–2800 or electronic mail: 

Jeanette.Palmer@ams.usda.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeanette Palmer, Marketing Specialist, 

Promotion and Economics Division, 

Fruit and Vegetable Program, AMS, 

USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue 

SW., Room 1406–S, Stop 0244, 

Washington, DC 20250–0244; telephone: 

(202) 720–9915; facsimile: (202) 205– 

2800; or electronic mail: 

Jeanette.Palmer@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Order 

(7 CFR part 1206) is authorized under 

the Commodity Promotion, Research, 

and Information Act of 1996 (Act) (7 

U.S.C. 7411–7425). 

The Order became effective on 

November 3, 2004. It is administered by 

the National Mango Board (Board) with 

oversight by the Department. The 

program is financed by an assessment of 

three-quarters of a cent per pound on 

first handlers and importers of 500,000 

pounds or more of mangos annually. 

The Order specifies that first handlers 

are responsible for submitting 

assessments to the Board on a monthly 

basis and maintaining records necessary 

to verify their reporting. Importers are 

responsible for paying assessments on 

mangos imported for consumption in 

the United States through the U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection. The 

purpose of the Order is to carry out an 

effective, continuous, and coordinated 

program of promotion, research, and 

information designed to strengthen 

mangos’ competitive position, and to 

maintain and expand the domestic 

market for mangos. 

The Board is composed of 18 

members as follows: 8 importers; 2 

domestic producers; 1 first handler; and 

7 foreign producers. Nominations for 

importer, domestic producer, and first 

handler members are solicited by 

importers, domestic producers, and first 

handlers, respectively. Nominations for 

foreign producer members are solicited 

from foreign producers and foreign 

producer associations. Members are 

appointed to the Board by the Secretary 

of Agriculture and serve a term of three 

years. 

There are approximately 190 

importers and 5 first handlers of mangos 

subject to the provisions of the Order. 

The majority of importers, first handlers 

and producers may be classified as 

small entities. 

AMS published in the Federal 

Register on March 24, 2006, (71 FR 

14827) its plan to review certain 

regulations, including the mango 

program, under criteria contained in 

section 610 of the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601– 

612). Because many AMS regulations 

impact small entities, AMS decided, as 

a matter of policy, to review certain 

regulations which, although they may 

not meet the threshold requirement 

under section 610 of the RFA, warrant 

review. 

AMS published a notice of review and 

request for written comments in the 

Federal Register on June 20, 2014 (79 

FR 35296). The comment period ended 

on August 19, 2014. Three comments 

were received in response to the notice 

and are discussed later in this 

document. 

The review was undertaken to 

determine whether the Order should be 

continued without change, amended, or 

rescinded (consistent with the 

objectives of the Act) to minimize the 

impacts on small entities. AMS 

considered the following factors: (1) The 

continued need for the Order; (2) the 

nature of complaints or comments 

received from the public concerning the 

Order; (3) the complexity of the Order; 

(4) the extent to which the Order 

overlaps, duplicates, or conflicts with 

other Federal rules, and, to the extent 

feasible, with State and local 

regulations; and (5) the length of time 

since the Order has been evaluated or 

the degree to which technology, 

economic conditions, or other factors 

have changed in the area affected by the 

Order. 

Continued Need for the Order. Based 

on its review, the Department has 

concluded that there is a continued 

need for the Order. Numerous benefits 

to the mango industry would likely not 

be achieved without the research and 

promotion collectively funded through 

the Order. The Board continues to 

conduct useful research projects on 

various aspects of mango production, 

processing, and nutritional impacts. 

Examples of recent studies include 

potential beneficial impacts of mango 

consumption on mitigating diseases 

such as diabetes, breast cancer and 

colon cancer. 

An impact study conducted in 2010 1

reviewed the Board’s investment in 

developing a database for monitoring 

potential and actual mango consumers, 

and found that the data is quite useful 

for economic research and for other 

analytical purposes. The economic data 

was used for evaluating NMB program 

impacts on mango demand, and 

concluded that the impact was 

significant. 

The majority of mangos consumed in 

the United States are imported and the 

study reported that the value of U.S. 

mango imports grew from $169 million 

to $217 million during the period 

covered by the study, 2005 through 

2009. The growth in value was the 

result of both higher prices and greater 

volumes imported. 

Nature of Complaints and Comments. 

The three public comments received are 

discussed in the following paragraphs. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
67042 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

Two commenters expressed support 

for the mango program. One commenter 

stated that the program has helped 

expand the market and presentation of 

fresh mangos in general. The commenter 

also opined that the program has helped 

improve stability in the marketplace. 

Another commenter stated that the 

Board provides a great service through 

education, marketing, and research to 

help increase the awareness and 

consumption of mangos. 

One commenter opposed the program 

and argued that taxpayer dollars should 

not be used to promote mangos. 

Research and promotion programs 

overseen by USDA are self-help 

programs and do not receive taxpayer 

funds. The mango program is funded by 

first handlers and importers of mangos. 

Complexity of the Order. The Order is 

not unduly complex. It provides 

authority for the Board to collect 

assessments from mango importers and 

first handlers to help maintain and 

expand the domestic market for mangos. 

Extent To Which the Order Overlaps, 

Duplicates, or Conflicts With Other 

Regulations. The Department has not 

identified regulations that duplicate, 

overlap, or conflict with the Order. 

Degree To Which Technology, 

Economic Conditions or Other Factors 

Have Changed. Regarding evaluations of 

the program or the degree to which 

technology, economic conditions, or 

other factors have changed in the area 

affected by the Order, section 512(a)(6) 

of the Act and section 1206.51 of the 

Order require the Board to evaluate the 

program and to comply with the 

independent evaluation provision of the 

Federal Agricultural Improvement and 

Reform Act of 1996 (FAIR) [7 USC 7401] 

every five years. The goal of these 

evaluations is to assure that the Order 

and the regulations implemented under 

it fit the needs of the industry and are 

consistent with the Act. 

The Board conducted an evaluation of 

the program under the FAIR Act in 2010 

and the next five-year evaluation is due 

in 2015. The previously mentioned 

study conducted by Dr. Ward with the 

University of Florida was part of the 

2010 evaluation. It used household 

panel data to develop econometric 

models for measuring the Board’s 

impact on increasing mango demand. 

The models established that the Board 

has had a positive economic impact for 

the demand for mangos, mostly by 

attracting more buyers (increased 

market penetration), and to a lesser 

extent, by increasing the number of 

mango purchases per buyer. The study 

concluded that every $1 invested in 

Board activities adds an additional $7 in 

mango industry revenue. The volume of 

mango imports is expected to continue 

to increase in the future. 

Based upon its review, AMS has 

determined that the Order should be 

continued. AMS plans to continue 

working with the mango industry in 

maintaining an effective program. 

Dated: November 4, 2014. 

Rex A. Barnes, 

Associate Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26654 Filed 11–10–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0452; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–185–AD; Amendment 

39–18013; AD 2014–22–08] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and 

A321 series airplanes. This AD was 

prompted by a determination that more 

restrictive airworthiness limitations are 

necessary. This AD requires revising the 

maintenance or inspection program as 

applicable. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent a safety-significant latent failure 

(which is not annunciated) which, in 

combination with one or more other 

specific failures or events, would result 

in a hazardous or catastrophic failure 

condition. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

December 17, 2014. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of December 17, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov/

#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0452 or in 

person at the Docket Management 

Facility, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus, Airworthiness 

Office—EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice 

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; 

telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 

61 93 44 51; email account.airwortheas@airbus.com; Internet http://

www.airbus.com. You may view this 

referenced service information at the 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227– 

1221. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1405; 

fax 425–227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 by adding an AD that would 

apply to all Airbus Model A318, A319, 

A320, and A321 series airplanes. The 

NPRM published in the Federal 

Register on July 18, 2014 (79 FR 41938). 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2013–0148, 

dated July 16, 2013 (referred to after this 

as the Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

all Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, 

and A321 series airplanes. The MCAI 

states: 

The airworthiness limitations for Airbus 

aeroplanes are currently published in 

Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) 

documents. The airworthiness limitations 

applicable to the Certification Maintenance 

Requirements (CMR) were previously 

specified in AIRBUS A318/A319/A320/A321 

CMR document referenced AI/ST4/993.436/

88. 

DGAC France issued AD F–2005–101 

[(http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/easa_ad_

2005_5886_F20051010tb_superseded.pdf/

AD_F-2005-101_2)] (EASA approval 2005– 

5886) to require compliance with the 

maintenance tasks as specified in that 

document. 

Since that [DGAC France] AD was issued, 

the CMR tasks are specified in Airbus A318/ 

A319/A320/A321 ALS Part 3, which is 

approved by EASA. The original issue of this 

document introduced more restrictive 

maintenance requirements and/or 

airworthiness limitations. Failure to comply 

with the maintenance requirements 

contained in this document could result in 

an unsafe condition. 

For the reasons described above, this 

[EASA] AD supersedes DGAC France AD F– 

2005–101 and requires the implementation of 

the instructions and airworthiness 

limitations as specified in Airbus A318/

A319/A320/A321 ALS Part 3 Revision 01. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES